Frictional force of different ligations with NiTi archwires of different sizes

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.0916

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Clinical evidence has proved that loose ligation can shorten the initial alignment time of the tooth compared with traditional ligation, but little is reported on the difference among loose ligation with NiTi archwires, self-ligation and traditional ligation.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the frictional force of different orthodontic technologies by comparing the sliding frictional force of different ligations, brackets, and NiTi wires.

METHODS: A plaster model with moderately crowded teeth was randomly and the bonding bracket was labeled using a cross mark. A corresponding dentition model was then copied by three-dimensional scanning and three-dimensional printing techniques. Different brackets, ceramic self-ligating brackets (Damon Clear, Habit), metal self-ligating brackets (Damon 3MX, AO), metal conventional bracket (3M) and ceramic conventional bracket (Habit) were bonded to the cross mark of the model. For each bracket, there were TiNi wires with four sizes, 0.012 (A) and 0.014 inch (B) hyperelastic NiTi, 0.014 inch thermally activated NiTi (C), and 0.014 inch Cu-NiTi (D). Tight and loose ligations were performed using two conventional brackets, and the sliding frictional force between the wire and the bracket was detected using a microcomputer servo dynamometer.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) For the loose ligation using the 3M conventional bracket, the sliding frictional force of different NiTi was ranked as A < C < B < D (P < 0.01); for the loose ligation using the Habit conventional bracket, the sliding frictional force of different NiTi was ranked as C < A < B < D (P < 0.01). (2) When using wire A or B, the sliding frictional force of 3M conventional bracket with loose ligation was higher than that of 3M self-ligating bracket and AO self-ligating bracket (P < 0.01) and was lower than that of 3M convention bracket with tight ligation (P < 0.01). When using wire C or D, the sliding frictional force of 3M conventional bracket with loose ligation was higher than that of AO self-ligating bracket (P < 0.01), but lower than that of 3M conventional bracket with tight ligation (P < 0.01). (3) When using any wire, the sliding frictional force of Habit conventional bracket with loose ligation was higher than that of Damon Clear self-ligating bracket and Habit self-ligating bracket (P < 0.01), and lower than that of Habit conventional bracket with tight ligation (P < 0.01). These experimental results reveal that loose ligation can reduce the frictional force of conventional brackets compared to traditional ligation, but it is still inferior to self-ligating brackets. Therefore, small-size and low-friction wires are recommended to further reduce the frictional force.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：生物材料；骨生物材料; 口腔生物材料; 纳米材料; 缓释材料; 材料相容性；组织工程

Key words: Orthodontics, Corrective, Orthodontic Wires, Friction, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Ma Xiao-zhou, Li Hong-fa, Zhao Yan-hong, Wu Jie, Zhang Ming-can, Zhao Wei. Frictional force of different ligations with NiTi archwires of different sizes[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.0916.

Figures/Tables 10

2.3 传统金属托槽松结扎的摩擦力分析最大静摩擦力：使用A，C，D三种弓丝时，普通金属托槽松结扎与自锁托槽的摩擦力比较无差异(P > 0.05)。弓丝B入槽后，主动自锁托槽和普通金属托槽松结扎之间的摩擦力比较无差异(P > 0.05)，但被动自锁托槽和普通金属托槽松结扎的摩擦力比较有差异(P < 0.01)。使用B，C，D弓丝时，普通金属传统结扎和松结扎的摩擦力比较有差异(P < 0.05)，在使用弓丝B时的差异性更明显(P < 0.001)。使用弓丝A时，普通金属传统结扎和松结扎的摩擦力比较无明显差异(P > 0.05)。滑动摩擦力：选用4组弓丝中任何一组，普通金属托槽松结扎和传统结扎及主动自锁托槽的摩擦力两两比较均有差异(P < 0.01)；使用弓丝A，B时，被动自锁托槽和普通金属松结扎技术的摩擦力比较有差异；使用弓丝C，D时，被动自锁托槽和普通金属托槽松结扎技术的摩擦力比较无差异。比较结果说明，普通金属托槽松结扎技术的最大静摩擦力与自锁托槽相似；使用任一弓丝时，普通金属托槽松结扎与主动自锁金属托槽的滑动摩擦力比较差异均有显著性意义(P < 0.01)。使用弓丝C，D时，普通金属托槽松结扎与与被动自锁金属托槽的滑动摩擦力比较差异无差异(P > 0.05)，C，D弓丝分别是热激活NiTi弓丝和含铜NiTi弓丝，这两种弓丝在被动自锁托槽和传统托槽松结扎两种入槽方式下的摩擦力值相似，见表5、表6、图5。结合前文排序结果：使用弓丝A时，摩擦力大小1<2<6<5；弓丝B入槽时，摩擦力大小2<1<6<5；弓丝C入槽时，摩擦力大小2<6<1<5；使用弓丝D时，摩擦力大小2<1<6<5，说明使用弓丝A，B时，自锁托槽、传统金属托槽松结扎和传统金属托槽传统结扎的摩擦力大小有差异，主被动自锁托槽的摩擦力经Meta分析得出无差异[9]，可得出弓丝A，B在不同入槽方式下的摩擦力排序一致；使用弓丝C，D时，被动自锁托槽和普通金属托槽松结扎的摩擦力比较无明显差异，可理解为弓丝C，D在不同入槽方式下的摩擦力排序相同。前文得到弓丝B，D入槽后按摩擦力大小的排序一致，经统计学分析发现两者有差异，使用弓丝B时，1和6的摩擦力比较有差异；使用弓丝D时，1和6的摩擦力无差异。"

References

[1] 郭杰.临床结扎力量与口内托槽沿不锈钢弓丝滑动的摩擦力[J].国外医学:口腔医学分册,2004,31(4):328.

[2] 林新平.临床口腔正畸生物力学机制解析[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2012:106.

[3] Shivapuja PK,Berger J.A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligationbracket systems.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1994;106(5):472-480.

[4] Kusy RP,Whitley JQ.Friction between different wire-bracketconfigurations and materials//Seminars in orthodontics.WB Saunders,1997;3(3):166-177.

[5] 张明灿,李洪发,武杰等.松结扎在正畸排齐阶段的初步研究[J].中国美容医学,2014,23(8):655-658.

[6] 张明灿,赵丽丽,孙海媛,等.不锈钢结扎丝松结扎法在口腔正畸固定矫治术中的应用体会[J].山东医药,2015,55(26):106-107.

[7] 段沛沛,张林,赵青,等.自锁托槽矫治系统相关生物力学的研究进展[J].国际口腔医学杂志,2012,39(5): 661-663.

[8] 刘刚,杨丽,刘斌,等.口腔正畸摩擦研究进展[J].摩擦学学报, 2018, 38(2):238-246.

[9] Papageorgiou SN,Konstantinidis I,Papadopoulou K,et al.A systematic review and meta—analysis of experimental clinical evidence on initial aligning archwires and archwire sequences.Orthod Craniofac Res.2014;17(4):197-215．

[10] 林新平.临床口腔正畸生物力学机制解析[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2012:102.

[11] 张昊,王林,马俊青.口腔正畸弓丝表面改性技术的研究进展[J].口腔生物医学,2013,4(4):209-213.

[12] 蔡先彬.复合工艺聚四氟乙烯涂层的摩擦学研究[D].苏州大学, 2016.

[13] 邵玶,隋解和,冯雪,等.TiNi 合金牙弓丝表面环氧树脂/聚四氟乙烯涂层的组织结构与性能[J].稀有金属材料与工程, 2012,41(5): 822-825.

[14] Farronato G,Maijer R,Carìa MP,et al.The effect of Teflon coating on the resistance to sliding of orthodontic archwires. Eur J Orthod.2011;34(4):410-417.

[15] 白雪芹,曾祥龙.低摩擦结扎圈在牙齿排齐阶段静摩擦力的实验研究[J].口腔正畸学,2008,15(2):78-80.

[16] Henao SP,Kusy RP.Evaluation of the frictional resistance of conventional and self-ligating bracket designs using standardized archwires and dental typodonts.Angle Orthod. 2004;74(2): 202-211.

[17] 张丽雯,宋立滨,张瑾,等.不同托槽与弓丝组合滑动摩擦力的实验研究[J].中华口腔正畸学杂志,2017,24(1):10-13.

[18] Thorstenson GA,Kusy RP.Comparison of resistance to sliding between different self-ligating brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and saliva states.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121(5):472-482.

[19] 杨慧芳,赵建江,王勇.3D打印技术在口腔医学领域中的应用[J].中国医疗设备,2015,30(5):63-65.

[20] Kasparova M,Grafova L,Dvorak P,et al.Possibility of reconstruction of dental plaster cast from 3D digital study models. Biomed Eng Online.2013;12(1):49.

[21] Tavares A,Braga E,Araújo TM,et al.Digital models: How can dental arch form be verified chairside?Dental Press J Orthod. 2017;22(6):68-73.

[22] Darroudi AM,Kuijpersjagtman AM,Ongkosuwito EM,et al.Accuracy of a computed tomography scanning procedure to manufacture digital models.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2017;151(5):995-1003.

[23] Majstorovic N,Zivkovic S,Glisic B.The advanced model definition and analysis of orthodontic parameters on 3D digital models.Srp Arh Celok Lek.2017;145(11-12):11.

[24] 冯全胜,马笮,徐文秀,等.口腔3D打印模型与传统石膏模型精确性对比研究[J].中国老年保健医学,2015,13(3):80-81.

[25] Alcan T,Ceylano?lu C,Baysal B.The relationship between digital model accuracy and time-dependent deformation of alginate impressions.Angle Orthod.2009;79(1):30-36.

[26] Torassian G,Kau CH,English JD,et al.Digital models vs plaster models using alginate and alginate substitute materials.Angle Orthodontist.2010;80(4):474-481.

[27] 李晶,王硕,张达,等.口内扫描数字化模型与硅橡胶制取石膏模型测量的对比研究[J].中华口腔正畸学杂志, 2013,20(3):163-166.

[28] Hwang CJ,Shin JS,Cha JY.Metal release from simulated fixed orthodontic appliances.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2001; 120(4):383-391.

[29] 王天丛,陈文静,王文梅,等.单晶和多晶陶瓷托槽与金属弓丝摩擦力的对比研究[J].口腔医学,2013,33(12):821-823.

[30] Thomas S,Sherriff M,Birnie D.A comparative in vitro study of the frictional characteristics of two types of self-ligating brackets and two types of pre-adjusted edgewise brackets tied with elastomeric ligatures.Eur J Orthod. 998;20(5): 589-596.

[31] Kapur R,Sinha PK,Nanda RS.Frictional resistance of the Damon SL bracket.J Clin Orthod. 1998;32(8):485.

[32] Pizzoni L,Ravnholt G,Melsen B.Frictional forces related to self-ligating brackets.Eur J Orthod.1998;20(3):283-291.

[33] Peososki RR,Bagby MD,Erick LC.Static frictional force and surface roughnessof nickel-titanium arch wires.Am J Orthod. 1991;100(4):341-348.

[34] 王娅婷,王军.自锁托槽与传统托槽的临床比较[J].国际口腔医学杂志,2010,37(4):492-495.

[35] 顾月光,赵春洋,马俊青,等.主动、被动自锁托槽摩擦力的meta分析研究[J].口腔医学,2012,32(5):257-262.

[36] Offenbacher S,Beck JD,Moss K,et al.Results from the Periodontitis and Vascular Events (PAVE) Study: a pilot multicentered, randomized, controlled trial to study effects of periodontal therapy in a secondary prevention model of cardiovascular disease.J Periodontol.2009;80(2):190-201.

[37] Queiroz GV,Ballester RY,De Paiva JB,et al.Comparative study of frictional forces generated by NiTi archwire deformation in different orthodontic brackets: In vitro evaluation.Dental Press J Orthod.2012;17(4):45-50.